Technology

37800 readers

499 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

No time to read? Google’s new AI will turn anything into an NPR segment (www.washingtonpost.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In this case, Facebook's 99-page user policy. The results, embedded in the story, are worth a listen. This is is some serious sci-fi shit compared to ChatGPT.

Archive link ... unfortunately, as I feared, the audio didn't work for me. Here is the direct link to the clip.

I edited the title because people thought this was about actual podcasts. It just generates conversational audio about the content.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] andrew_s@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I know all the cool kids hate on AI, but as someone out of the loop, that 'podcast' is really impressive. I guess it speaks to how a influential certain style of podcasting is (from the likes of NPR) that a machine can copy it the same as other humans do.

As for the embedded link, this works for me (and others on the same site as me), but it might not for others:

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 6 points 2 months ago

I don't know that it's influential so much as formulaic. It's been working for them for decades. And without it, we'd never have gotten Schweddy Balls, and that's a worse timeline.

For real fun, submit your resume (that shit's already all over online; Google can have it) and listen to NPR hosts take 7 minutes to describe your career arc.

[–] zygo_histo_morpheus@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think that it is impressive, but not necessarily that useful? In particular, you can't really trust what they're saying to be accurate so it doesn't actually give you that much usable information.

Very cool, but I'm not sure what I would actually use it for.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is just fancy transcription, the only thing you can't trust it to be saying is the article itself...

[–] zygo_histo_morpheus@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No, the podcast can absolutely missrepresent the thing that it's sumarizing. The podcast also adds commentary, and I think it's especially this commentary that I find unreliable.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 1 points 2 months ago

Ah, if it also adds commentary then sure. When I tested it out a few times it was just retelling the articles verbatim.